Mere Engagement Does Not Permit A Person To Sexually Assault His Fiancé: Delhi High Court In Bail Order

Denying bail to a man accused of raping his fiancé multiple times on the pretext of their planned marriage, the Delhi High Court has observed that mere fact of being engaged does not mean that the accused can sexually assault, beat or threaten her.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma made the observation while rejecting the argument made on behalf of the accused that since the parties were engaged, it cannot be said that there was false promise of marriage.

"However, in this Court's opinion, the argument has no force, since the mere fact of being engaged did not mean that the accused could have sexually assaulted, beaten or threatened the victim," the court said in an order dated September 22.

The court also noted that as per the victim's statement, the sexual relation established on the first occasion was also on the pretext of marriage.

The FIR was registered on July 16 under Section 376 (punishment for rape) and 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Charge Sheet was filed in the case on September 16.

The victim had alleged that after being friends with the accused since October 2020 and having been together for almost a year, they got engaged on October 11 last year with the consent of their family members.

As per the FIR, four days after the engagement, the accused forcibly established physical relationship with the victim on the pretext that they were engaged to each other and would be getting married soon.

Further, the petitioner was accused of having mercilessly beaten the victim, in an intoxicated state. He allegedly established a non-consensual physical relationship with her on several occasions, which allegedly even resulted in her pregnancy. The victim was given pills by the accused to abort the pregnancy in February this year, as per the FIR.

The FIR further alleges that on July 9, when the victim went to the house of the accused, he and his family members refused to solemnise the marriage, which led to filing of the complaint.

Calling the allegations made by the victim regarding forcible abortion by administration of pills as 'very serious', the court said:

"A woman who was yet unmarried may not have kept the evidence of same for reasons to save her honour."

Perusing the victim's statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) as well as the charge sheet, the Court observed that the allegations levelled by the prosecutrix were serious in nature which showed that she had been sexually assaulted and raped on several occasions by the accused on false pretext of marriage.

"Thus, considering the seriousness of the offence, the nature of allegations and the fact that the charges have not been framed yet and trial is yet to commence, this is not a fit case for grant of bail," the court said.

Case Title: XYZ v. THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 937

Click Here To Read Order